Soapbox: Some changes are needed to improve camera policy

Jan. 28, 2014

In reviewing the City Council agenda for the Oct. 15, 2013, meeting, the Fort Collins Community Action Network, or FCCAN, noticed an item whereby Fort Collins Police Services was asking for $182,000 to purchase 40 additional “body-worn cameras,” bringing the total to 60. This item was on the consent calendar, the portion of the agenda intended for noncontroversial items.

We spoke to councilman Bob Overbeck and asked him to move the item to the regular agenda, since we thought it worthy of discussion. We then did some research into body-worn cameras, commonly referred to as mobile audio/video, or MAV, recording devices.

Fort Collins police began testing the cameras in 2012; and by May of 2013, 20 had been deployed. Nationally, the American Civil Liberties Union submitted a statement concerning these cameras in October (see www.aclu.org/technology-and-liberty/police-body-mounted-cameras-right-policies-place-win-all.) As the title suggests, the ACLU supports the use of MAV cameras for their ability to increase accountability, but only when governed by stringent policies to protect the general public.

It is the position of FCCAN that the current Fort Collins police standard operating procedure, or SOP, is not sufficiently stringent, specifically in the following areas (see www.fcgov.com/police/pdf/body-worn-camera-policy.pdf for the section numbers referenced below):

• It allows the chief of police to surreptitiously record officers’ conversations, simply as a matter of administration function (446.3.4). FCCAN’s position is that the chief should be not granted this ability.

• These cameras are not intended to be hidden. Yet, they are small (see www.fcgov.com/police/body-worn-cameras-gallery.php) and hard to detect. FCCAN recommends a verbal announcement be required for every police interaction (e.g. “I’m Officer Jones and I’m wearing a video camera”).

(Page 2 of 2)

• The SOP allows the chief of police to hand over recordings to the media and to circumvent proper process in handing the recordings to the courts (446.4). FCCAN recommends that this authority not be granted to the chief of police.

• The SOP allows recordings to be used in police trainings (446.4). FCCAN recommends that recordings only be used as evidence in the way outlined elsewhere in the SOP (446.3.3).

• Police officers are given far too much discretion in turning the device off and on; the language is far too loose in addressing this matter (446.3). FCCAN’s position is that officers should keep the cameras on at all times when they are in contact with members of the general public.

• These cameras have the potential to go into our most intimate spaces, including our homes. FCCAN believes that opting out should be an option when officers are entering homes in nonemergency situations.

• Careful study must be done to ensure that the cameras are effective in their intended use. If, for example, it is determined that victims of crimes such as domestic violence are hesitating to call the police for fear of being videotaped, we must adjust the policy.

Council approved the $182,000 for the 40 additional MAVs, which will be fully deployed by the summer. Council also instructed Chief John Hutto to hold a community meeting to demonstrate the MAVs and to solicit input on the SOP. The meeting will be held 7 to 8 p.m. Thursday at the Coloradoan meeting room, 1300 Riverside Ave. Please come and express your opinions about the cameras and the policy that guides their use. We look forward to a valuable discussion that will result in a policy that will benefit us all.